that is — while the story makes mentionof the broader implications of the nacchiodocuments [putative evidence of a PRE-9/11program — or effort to create a program — toengage in wholesale, systemic, warrantless sur-veillance of innocent american citizens], it doesnothing to analyze the unsealed documentsfrom that point of view. . .

i think the documents do undercutthe claim of retaliation madeby nacchio — but that is, in itself — scarcely a surprise.in fact, the idea that a con-victed felon might allege theexistence of a wide-ranging “g-man” vendetta against him,personally, is rather yawn-inducingin many white-collar criminal defense circles.

it should scarcely be the lede of a wa postory, in fact. now, the reason i’ve spentso many electrons above, casting aspersionson the credibility of nacchio’s retaliationclaim is that it is not the news-story, at all.

the news-story here is that the government’sown documents — from early 2001 — corroboratethat substantial meetings on a project called“groundbreaker” actually took place.

forget whether it offers a “soft-information is non-actionable“defense to the nacchio insider-trading charges, and subsequent conviction. . .

focus on the fact that the belowexcerpts of an interview with james payne,the government-contracting v.p. atqwest, confirm that a wide-ranging,clandestine contracting-process wasunderway in february of 2001. the belowis from page 24 of last night’s unsealedgovernment filing — it is part of thesecond appendix of that filing.

click to enlarge:

folks — this is significant. why wasour government working on “groundbreaker”a full seven months BEFORE 9/11?

to be clear, i am implying only thatcheney and bush wanted to thwart theconstitution’s warrant requirement priorto their immensely tragic, yet-entirely-fortuitous excuse — the excuse of global terror attacks [i don’t subscribe, in any fashion, to thetin-foil-hatted-notions that ourgovernment concocted 9/11, at all].

w h e w. . .

but seriously — if it can be shownthat cheney and bush were activelyseeking warrantless surveillance ofu.s. citizens before 9/11, that wouldbe the sort of “high crime and mis-demeanor” we have been waiting on prooffor — and this proof comes from thegovernmnet’s own documents, no less.

forget for a moment, that joe nacchio,as a convicted felon, is trying toescape jail for insider-trading, bydint of unsealing these documents. . .and read them with your better eyes — theeyes that freshly-acknowledge these aregenuine government admissions. noticethat the blackened portions refer toclassified agencies and classified projects.

that is — while the story makes mentionof the broader implications of the nacchiodocuments [putative evidence of a PRE-9/11program — or effort to create a program — toengage in wholesale, systemic, warrantless sur-veillance of innocent american citizens], it doesnothing to analyze the unsealed documentsfrom that point of view. . .

i think the documents do undercutthe claim of retaliation madeby nacchio — but that is, in itself — scarcely a surprise.in fact, the idea that a con-victed felon might allege theexistence of a wide-ranging “g-man” vendetta against him,personally, is rather yawn-inducingin many white-collar criminal defense circles.

it should scarcely be the lede of a wa postory, in fact. now, the reason i’ve spentso many electrons above, casting aspersionson the credibility of nacchio’s retaliationclaim is that it is not the news-story, at all.

the news-story here is that the government’sown documents — from early 2001 — corroboratethat substantial meetings on a project called“groundbreaker” actually took place.

forget whether it offers a “soft-information is non-actionable“defense to the nacchio insider-trading charges, and subsequent conviction. . .

focus on the fact that the belowexcerpts of an interview with james payne,the government-contracting v.p. atqwest, confirm that a wide-ranging,clandestine contracting-process wasunderway in february of 2001. the belowis from page 24 of last night’s unsealedgovernment filing — it is part of thesecond appendix of that filing.

click to enlarge:

folks — this is significant. why wasour government working on “groundbreaker”a full seven months BEFORE 9/11?

to be clear, i am implying only thatcheney and bush wanted to thwart theconstitution’s warrant requirement priorto their immensely tragic, yet-entirely-fortuitous excuse — the excuse of global terror attacks [i don’t subscribe, in any fashion, to thetin-foil-hatted-notions that ourgovernment concocted 9/11, at all].

w h e w. . .

but seriously — if it can be shownthat cheney and bush were activelyseeking warrantless surveillance ofu.s. citizens before 9/11, that wouldbe the sort of “high crime and mis-demeanor” we have been waiting on prooffor — and this proof comes from thegovernmnet’s own documents, no less.

forget for a moment, that joe nacchio,as a convicted felon, is trying toescape jail for insider-trading, bydint of unsealing these documents. . .and read them with your better eyes — theeyes that freshly-acknowledge these aregenuine government admissions. noticethat the blackened portions refer toclassified agencies and classified projects.

that is — while the story makes mentionof the broader implications of the nacchiodocuments [putative evidence of a PRE-9/11program — or effort to create a program — toengage in wholesale, systemic, warrantless sur-veillance of innocent american citizens], it doesnothing to analyze the unsealed documentsfrom that point of view. . .

i think the documents do undercutthe claim of retaliation madeby nacchio — but that is, in itself — scarcely a surprise.in fact, the idea that a con-victed felon might allege theexistence of a wide-ranging “g-man” vendetta against him,personally, is rather yawn-inducingin many white-collar criminal defense circles.

it should scarcely be the lede of a wa postory, in fact. now, the reason i’ve spentso many electrons above, casting aspersionson the credibility of nacchio’s retaliationclaim is that it is not the news-story, at all.

the news-story here is that the government’sown documents — from early 2001 — corroboratethat substantial meetings on a project called“groundbreaker” actually took place.

forget whether it offers a “soft-information is non-actionable“defense to the nacchio insider-trading charges, and subsequent conviction. . .

focus on the fact that the belowexcerpts of an interview with james payne,the government-contracting v.p. atqwest, confirm that a wide-ranging,clandestine contracting-process wasunderway in february of 2001. the belowis from page 24 of last night’s unsealedgovernment filing — it is part of thesecond appendix of that filing.

click to enlarge:

folks — this is significant. why wasour government working on “groundbreaker”a full seven months BEFORE 9/11?

to be clear, i am implying only thatcheney and bush wanted to thwart theconstitution’s warrant requirement priorto their immensely tragic, yet-entirely-fortuitous excuse — the excuse of global terror attacks [i don’t subscribe, in any fashion, to thetin-foil-hatted-notions that ourgovernment concocted 9/11, at all].

w h e w. . .

but seriously — if it can be shownthat cheney and bush were activelyseeking warrantless surveillance ofu.s. citizens before 9/11, that wouldbe the sort of “high crime and mis-demeanor” we have been waiting on prooffor — and this proof comes from thegovernmnet’s own documents, no less.

forget for a moment, that joe nacchio,as a convicted felon, is trying toescape jail for insider-trading, bydint of unsealing these documents. . .and read them with your better eyes — theeyes that freshly-acknowledge these aregenuine government admissions. noticethat the blackened portions refer toclassified agencies and classified projects.

that is — while the story makes mentionof the broader implications of the nacchiodocuments [putative evidence of a PRE-9/11program — or effort to create a program — toengage in wholesale, systemic, warrantless sur-veillance of innocent american citizens], it doesnothing to analyze the unsealed documentsfrom that point of view. . .

i think the documents do undercutthe claim of retaliation madeby nacchio — but that is, in itself — scarcely a surprise.in fact, the idea that a con-victed felon might allege theexistence of a wide-ranging “g-man” vendetta against him,personally, is rather yawn-inducingin many white-collar criminal defense circles.

it should scarcely be the lede of a wa postory, in fact. now, the reason i’ve spentso many electrons above, casting aspersionson the credibility of nacchio’s retaliationclaim is that it is not the news-story, at all.

the news-story here is that the government’sown documents — from early 2001 — corroboratethat substantial meetings on a project called“groundbreaker” actually took place.

forget whether it offers a “soft-information is non-actionable“defense to the nacchio insider-trading charges, and subsequent conviction. . .

focus on the fact that the belowexcerpts of an interview with james payne,the government-contracting v.p. atqwest, confirm that a wide-ranging,clandestine contracting-process wasunderway in february of 2001. the belowis from page 24 of last night’s unsealedgovernment filing — it is part of thesecond appendix of that filing.

click to enlarge:

folks — this is significant. why wasour government working on “groundbreaker”a full seven months BEFORE 9/11?

to be clear, i am implying only thatcheney and bush wanted to thwart theconstitution’s warrant requirement priorto their immensely tragic, yet-entirely-fortuitous excuse — the excuse of global terror attacks [i don’t subscribe, in any fashion, to thetin-foil-hatted-notions that ourgovernment concocted 9/11, at all].

w h e w. . .

but seriously — if it can be shownthat cheney and bush were activelyseeking warrantless surveillance ofu.s. citizens before 9/11, that wouldbe the sort of “high crime and mis-demeanor” we have been waiting on prooffor — and this proof comes from thegovernmnet’s own documents, no less.

forget for a moment, that joe nacchio,as a convicted felon, is trying toescape jail for insider-trading, bydint of unsealing these documents. . .and read them with your better eyes — theeyes that freshly-acknowledge these aregenuine government admissions. noticethat the blackened portions refer toclassified agencies and classified projects.

that is — while the story makes mentionof the broader implications of the nacchiodocuments [putative evidence of a PRE-9/11program — or effort to create a program — toengage in wholesale, systemic, warrantless sur-veillance of innocent american citizens], it doesnothing to analyze the unsealed documentsfrom that point of view. . .

i think the documents do undercutthe claim of retaliation madeby nacchio — but that is, in itself — scarcely a surprise.in fact, the idea that a con-victed felon might allege theexistence of a wide-ranging “g-man” vendetta against him,personally, is rather yawn-inducingin many white-collar criminal defense circles.

it should scarcely be the lede of a wa postory, in fact. now, the reason i’ve spentso many electrons above, casting aspersionson the credibility of nacchio’s retaliationclaim is that it is not the news-story, at all.

the news-story here is that the government’sown documents — from early 2001 — corroboratethat substantial meetings on a project called“groundbreaker” actually took place.

forget whether it offers a “soft-information is non-actionable“defense to the nacchio insider-trading charges, and subsequent conviction. . .

focus on the fact that the belowexcerpts of an interview with james payne,the government-contracting v.p. atqwest, confirm that a wide-ranging,clandestine contracting-process wasunderway in february of 2001. the belowis from page 24 of last night’s unsealedgovernment filing — it is part of thesecond appendix of that filing.

click to enlarge:

folks — this is significant. why wasour government working on “groundbreaker”a full seven months BEFORE 9/11?

to be clear, i am implying only thatcheney and bush wanted to thwart theconstitution’s warrant requirement priorto their immensely tragic, yet-entirely-fortuitous excuse — the excuse of global terror attacks [i don’t subscribe, in any fashion, to thetin-foil-hatted-notions that ourgovernment concocted 9/11, at all].

w h e w. . .

but seriously — if it can be shownthat cheney and bush were activelyseeking warrantless surveillance ofu.s. citizens before 9/11, that wouldbe the sort of “high crime and mis-demeanor” we have been waiting on prooffor — and this proof comes from thegovernmnet’s own documents, no less.

forget for a moment, that joe nacchio,as a convicted felon, is trying toescape jail for insider-trading, bydint of unsealing these documents. . .and read them with your better eyes — theeyes that freshly-acknowledge these aregenuine government admissions. noticethat the blackened portions refer toclassified agencies and classified projects.

that is — while the story makes mentionof the broader implications of the nacchiodocuments [putative evidence of a PRE-9/11program — or effort to create a program — toengage in wholesale, systemic, warrantless sur-veillance of innocent american citizens], it doesnothing to analyze the unsealed documentsfrom that point of view. . .

i think the documents do undercutthe claim of retaliation madeby nacchio — but that is, in itself — scarcely a surprise.in fact, the idea that a con-victed felon might allege theexistence of a wide-ranging “g-man” vendetta against him,personally, is rather yawn-inducingin many white-collar criminal defense circles.

it should scarcely be the lede of a wa postory, in fact. now, the reason i’ve spentso many electrons above, casting aspersionson the credibility of nacchio’s retaliationclaim is that it is not the news-story, at all.

the news-story here is that the government’sown documents — from early 2001 — corroboratethat substantial meetings on a project called“groundbreaker” actually took place.

forget whether it offers a “soft-information is non-actionable“defense to the nacchio insider-trading charges, and subsequent conviction. . .

focus on the fact that the belowexcerpts of an interview with james payne,the government-contracting v.p. atqwest, confirm that a wide-ranging,clandestine contracting-process wasunderway in february of 2001. the belowis from page 24 of last night’s unsealedgovernment filing — it is part of thesecond appendix of that filing.

click to enlarge:

folks — this is significant. why wasour government working on “groundbreaker”a full seven months BEFORE 9/11?

to be clear, i am implying only thatcheney and bush wanted to thwart theconstitution’s warrant requirement priorto their immensely tragic, yet-entirely-fortuitous excuse — the excuse of global terror attacks [i don’t subscribe, in any fashion, to thetin-foil-hatted-notions that ourgovernment concocted 9/11, at all].

w h e w. . .

but seriously — if it can be shownthat cheney and bush were activelyseeking warrantless surveillance ofu.s. citizens before 9/11, that wouldbe the sort of “high crime and mis-demeanor” we have been waiting on prooffor — and this proof comes from thegovernmnet’s own documents, no less.

forget for a moment, that joe nacchio,as a convicted felon, is trying toescape jail for insider-trading, bydint of unsealing these documents. . .and read them with your better eyes — theeyes that freshly-acknowledge these aregenuine government admissions. noticethat the blackened portions refer toclassified agencies and classified projects.

that is — while the story makes mentionof the broader implications of the nacchiodocuments [putative evidence of a PRE-9/11program — or effort to create a program — toengage in wholesale, systemic, warrantless sur-veillance of innocent american citizens], it doesnothing to analyze the unsealed documentsfrom that point of view. . .

i think the documents do undercutthe claim of retaliation madeby nacchio — but that is, in itself — scarcely a surprise.in fact, the idea that a con-victed felon might allege theexistence of a wide-ranging “g-man” vendetta against him,personally, is rather yawn-inducingin many white-collar criminal defense circles.

it should scarcely be the lede of a wa postory, in fact. now, the reason i’ve spentso many electrons above, casting aspersionson the credibility of nacchio’s retaliationclaim is that it is not the news-story, at all.

the news-story here is that the government’sown documents — from early 2001 — corroboratethat substantial meetings on a project called“groundbreaker” actually took place.

forget whether it offers a “soft-information is non-actionable“defense to the nacchio insider-trading charges, and subsequent conviction. . .

focus on the fact that the belowexcerpts of an interview with james payne,the government-contracting v.p. atqwest, confirm that a wide-ranging,clandestine contracting-process wasunderway in february of 2001. the belowis from page 24 of last night’s unsealedgovernment filing — it is part of thesecond appendix of that filing.

click to enlarge:

folks — this is significant. why wasour government working on “groundbreaker”a full seven months BEFORE 9/11?

to be clear, i am implying only thatcheney and bush wanted to thwart theconstitution’s warrant requirement priorto their immensely tragic, yet-entirely-fortuitous excuse — the excuse of global terror attacks [i don’t subscribe, in any fashion, to thetin-foil-hatted-notions that ourgovernment concocted 9/11, at all].

w h e w. . .

but seriously — if it can be shownthat cheney and bush were activelyseeking warrantless surveillance ofu.s. citizens before 9/11, that wouldbe the sort of “high crime and mis-demeanor” we have been waiting on prooffor — and this proof comes from thegovernmnet’s own documents, no less.

forget for a moment, that joe nacchio,as a convicted felon, is trying toescape jail for insider-trading, bydint of unsealing these documents. . .and read them with your better eyes — theeyes that freshly-acknowledge these aregenuine government admissions. noticethat the blackened portions refer toclassified agencies and classified projects.